Sep 24, 2012 | Branding, Change, Marketing, Social Media
So, the Gruen team is down a member as Russell Howcroft moves on to take over running the ailing Channel 10. There must be a sense of irony here, he moves from career as a “Madman” moonlighting in a successful public subscription TV channel where he has pontificated on the merits and foibles of various advertising, to a struggling channel with an eroding advertising revenue base at a time when TV’s are turning off (my assumption) in favor of alternatives.
There are still plenty of TV’s out there, but are they being used as TV’s the way they were a decade ago? Probably not, they are playing recorded shows, either downloaded, bought via a subscription service or in a boxed set, and played when, and where it suits the viewer, on a whole range of devices, not when the “prime time” usage model of a fixed set and time table dictates.
How will an old school advertising guru perform in this environment of rapid and disruptive change? Even the disrupter, Google, who made a fortune out of placing ads in the way of what you are searching for has recognised that where you are is as important, and so are investing in Maps as a representation of the interface between the real world and the virtual one, seeing the next wave of innovation coming.
Good luck Russell, but my instinct is that a 30 year old social media whiz Kid may have been a better choice.
Sep 14, 2012 | Branding, Innovation, Marketing, Strategy
The shape of Apple after Steve Jobs has been a source of much scribbling, and the launch on Friday of the newest version of its golden goose, the iPhone 5 has given us a peek.
The razzamatazz has been huge, Apple all over, but they delivered what the pundits view as a pretty limp offering. Nothing new, apart from a different case, and behind current offerings from Samsung and HTC on a number of parameters.
However, what Apple does deliver that nobody can get close to is profits. On $150 billion forecast revenues this year, Apple is delivering an astounding 28% EBIT, double a year ago, and considerably more on phones according to Creative Strategies Tim Bajarin. All this as their sales in a market growing at 42% are increasing at only 27%.
Apple has its own ecosystem, so to some extent is protected from commodity type comparisons that erode price, but how much of a premium can they sustain, and for how long? Googles Android operating system now has around four times the share of Apple, from “even-stevens” just a year ago, and Google spends 14% of revenue on R&D, to Apples 2%. In dollar terms, they are about the same, and Apple has less of a product portfolio to manage, but the tide of initiative is now with Google, and the momentum is really hard to break.
It seems to me that Apple is mortgaging their future, putting the dough in the bank, much as Microsoft did in its halcyon days, and not continuing the drive that got them where they are today. In a sharp reminder of priorities, Apple is spending big on protecting its current position by suing everyone standing in the tech space, which must be a huge distraction from the disruptive innovations created almost yesterday that put them where they are now.
Aug 30, 2012 | Branding, Customers, Innovation, Strategy
Apple has beaten Samsung in the US court, protecting a raft of patents that apply to mobile devices, acquiring a pile of cash, and the probable withdrawal of a number of Samsung products from the market. Competitive nirvana.
Whilst it is understandable that Apple protect its commercial position through the courts, it is nevertheless a hypocrisy of vast proportions, and breaks the cycle of innovation that has characterised the mobile space over the last 5 years, and changed, if not enriched our lives, and is now turning into a legal quicksand that can only hamper innovation, whilst embedding incumbents into our wallets.
Tim Cook, Apple’s MD released a note describing the win thus: “For us this lawsuit has always been about something much more important than patents or money. It’s about values. We value originality and innovation and pour our lives into making the best products on earth.”
Excuse me whilst I throw up.
This contrasts to Steve Jobs 1994 statement that Apple had been “Shameless about stealing great ideas” then later reversing that position by saying Apple would go “thermo-nuclear to protect its position” when others sought to build on their innovations.
Copy, Transform, Combine.
This is the thesis articulated by Kirby Ferguson, that everything is a remix of what has gone before, creativity emerges from and builds on the efforts of others. In his TED talk, and outstanding series of short videos which expand on the ideas, he traces the source of our patent and copyright laws pointing out the purpose of the laws is no longer what they are used for, competitive forces have fundamentally changed them into something not intended.
Apple built on the ideas of others, adding remarkable creativity to them to bring us a series of innovations perhaps unequalled in their immediate impact on our lives, but now is using outdated legal interpretations of patent law to protect its position from others seeking to do exactly what they have done so shamelessly.
Hypocrisy for the sake of money, undermining innovation. Understandable, but very costly to the consumer, and to the march of innovation.
Aug 22, 2012 | Branding, Change, Innovation, Marketing, Social Media
People are always looking for answers in their lives, whilst mostly not being in a position to frame the question sufficiently to enable a search as specific as one on Google. It is a factor in our lives that contributes to the context in which we live where we go, who we interact with, what we buy and where, what we think of our jobs, partners, and future for our kids.
It is not too much of a stretch to think that a picture of these things can be built over time by a personalised version of the search and browse capabilities now available to us. It has been called the semantic web, web 3.0, and a bunch of other things, but it is really a bank of information about us, evolved by emerging AI that reflects out lives.
Imagine you were walking down a street, near a car dealership with a new French model, your semantic web planted in your device knows you like French wine, your current car is due to be changed, you favor sweeping lines in design, your kids have left home, so there is some money in the bank, you always hankered for sporty, a bit “left field” experiences, and you have a bit of time before the appointment that brings you to this location. Bingo, a personalised invitation for a cup of coffee, and a chat about the new model comes to you from someone in the dealership vaguely linked to you via a social network.
It is only a small jump away from where we are now, but changes the way the marketing process will work.
Aug 16, 2012 | Branding, Innovation, Management, Marketing
The decades of growth up till a couple of years ago, and the recognition of the key nature of a robust marketing input to corporate success has left many organisations, particularly brand heavy consumer organisations with a marketing overhead problem as times change.
They have a structure that is often 5 layers from the CMO to the assistant brand manager, organised along brand lines, and recently supplemented with category analysts, social media experts, and other service roles. All this at a time when consumer brands are under huge threat from retailer owned brands, global marketing, fragile demand, the erosion of the ability to differentiate by the ubiquity of information, and agile low cost competitors.
Just getting rid of every third head makes little sense, all you do is lose corporate memory, so you need to reorganise to deliver productivity from the investment in marketing overhead, although inevitably there will be personnel losses. Three questions to consider:
- Is marketing activity aligned to corporate priorities?. Many times I have seen lower levels in marketing departments beavering away at projects that bear little resemblance to the strategic priorities held in the corner office.
- Are project portfolios run alongside brand initiatives to ensure that the silos that evolve when brand groups are relatively autonomous are removed?.
- Have you made the hard choices about what projects will proceed, and which will be relegated to the car-park?. This is sometimes very hard, but is a crucial circuit breaker for innovation, with the caveat that those projects left are appropriately resourced.
This is not easy stuff, and most fail the test, which results in sub-optimal resource allocation decisions.
Jul 20, 2012 | Branding, Customers, Marketing, retail, Sales
Amidst the moans being heard from bricks and mortar retailers, you can still see in almost any store you choose to enter, opportunities to make the experience of shopping easier.
If it was more social, friendly, service oriented in stores, it follows that shoppers would find it easier to part with their money. Human beings are social animals, we herd, and congregate around things that interest and engage us, so it seems possible to dream up strategies that enable that behavior in a store, to make it an attractive occasion to go there, even if it is to your local supermarket, there are opportunities to reconstruct the experience.
Many consumers in high value categories, from furniture to electronics and whitegoods, are “showrooming”, doing some research on-line, then going into showrooms to have a look at the short list in the physical state, then go out and buy on line. Notice the disconnect there, sales people let them out of the showroom not just without a sale, but without permission to continue the nascent relationship.
On the other hand, I wandered into the Apple store last week, seeking information for a client, went back the next day for an information session targeted at the specific questions I had, and yesterday got a targeted email offering solutions to the problems I outlined in the session.
No wonder the Apple retail stores are breaking all retail records, and they are bricks and mortar, with a huge difference, they work at creating a relationship, recognising that it is the precursor to a sale.
